Never try to do something as complicated as attach some source to a mailing
list post after two beer and a hefty lunch.
Attachment is really here this time.
J
J Smith wrote:
>
> Speaking of the FD_* macros and such, I'm trying to visualize how to
> re-write some code that I have that rel
I would be happy to help in any way possible.
Your source wasn't attached though. Would you like an example?
(That or you can resend your source)
-Jason
On Fri, 2002-03-08 at 13:10, J Smith wrote:
>
> Speaking of the FD_* macros and such, I'm trying to visualize how to
> re-write some code th
Speaking of the FD_* macros and such, I'm trying to visualize how to
re-write some code that I have that relies on the socket_fd_* functions. If
you get the chance, could you look over this simplified version of what I'm
doing and point me towards the proper direction to get it working with th
On Fri, 2002-03-08 at 11:02, Markus Fischer wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 11:22:08AM -0500, J Smith wrote :
> > I'm thinking that this functionality is a bit too far removed from the
> > standard select() call [...]
>
> I agree on that. Let there be an int return from
> socket_select
On Fri, 2002-03-08 at 10:22, J Smith wrote:
>
> I don't think that's a hot idea. The return value of select() is an int for
> reason and not merely true or false. It's supposed to return the number of
> file descriptors that are ready for reading, writing or exceptions.
The correct behavior t
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 11:22:08AM -0500, J Smith wrote :
> I'm thinking that this functionality is a bit too far removed from the
> standard select() call [...]
I agree on that. Let there be an int return from
socket_select(). You still can return 'false' on error
condition.
--
I don't think that's a hot idea. The return value of select() is an int for
reason and not merely true or false. It's supposed to return the number of
file descriptors that are ready for reading, writing or exceptions.
According to the man file:
"On success, select and pselect return the numb
On Fri, 2002-03-08 at 03:48, Chris Vandomelen wrote:
> > For all those who don't follow CVS. The sockets extension modifications
> > I listed out a few weeks ago are complete, and will be included in the
> > 4.2.0 release.
>
> I haven't been following CVS, nor have I really paid a lot of attentio
> For all those who don't follow CVS. The sockets extension modifications
> I listed out a few weeks ago are complete, and will be included in the
> 4.2.0 release.
I haven't been following CVS, nor have I really paid a lot of attention to
the module. I have received the occasional email about the
For all those who don't follow CVS. The sockets extension modifications
I listed out a few weeks ago are complete, and will be included in the
4.2.0 release.
The extension will still be marked as experimental; however, if 4.2.0
goes well, and there are few bugs, perhaps it can be marked as stabl
10 matches
Mail list logo
